Smith & Wesson quality
- Thread starter Red Cent
- Start date
- Status
You should condider some of the better auctions (and I don't mean Gunbroker or GunsAmerica - nothing wrong with them, but the selection isn't the best.)
Try www.proxibid.com
If you are "stuck with Ruger's" I don't feel too bad...
Try www.proxibid.com
If you are "stuck with Ruger's" I don't feel too bad...
bsms
Member
I think we are in the Golden Age of shooting. 30 years ago, I lived in a small town. Want to buy a revolver? Haunt the pawn shops - no going to Davidsons or Buds and thinking about your choices. I have a Dan Wesson 357 from that time, and all my new, MIM'd S&Ws and Rugers are better quality.
The 3 S&Ws I've bought in the last couple of years have no real issues. The Model 29 has a small amount of creep, but I have to be very slow and careful on the trigger to feel it. DA is great, and the single action cocking a delight. The 686+ has a great SA trigger, but a bit more pull in DA than I care for.
Ruger? I've got an Alaskan. The finish sucks, but it shoots fantastic.
Off course, Ruger & S&W could put out flawless guns, but who would buy them? I already have fights enough with my wife, without wanting to buy a $2000 gun. And yes, every gun I own shoots better than me, and I can't afford the ammo to get better than them.
I've yet to hear of Ruger or S&W not making good on a bad gun. I honestly think you can buy with confidence, knowing that you will either receive a very good gun, or the two top companies will make it good.
The idea that S&W is churning out pee-poor guns chaps my butt. If someone here thinks they can do better, do so. To date, no one else is beating them at their price range. Ruger equals them, but most Rugers are so different in feel from most S&Ws that it seems odd to think of them as competitors.
Update: The Model 29 is just a couple of days old. Don't know if it is a bit of dry firing, or a couple rounds of Rem Oil followed by compressed air, but the creep is gone.
The 3 S&Ws I've bought in the last couple of years have no real issues. The Model 29 has a small amount of creep, but I have to be very slow and careful on the trigger to feel it. DA is great, and the single action cocking a delight. The 686+ has a great SA trigger, but a bit more pull in DA than I care for.
Ruger? I've got an Alaskan. The finish sucks, but it shoots fantastic.
Off course, Ruger & S&W could put out flawless guns, but who would buy them? I already have fights enough with my wife, without wanting to buy a $2000 gun. And yes, every gun I own shoots better than me, and I can't afford the ammo to get better than them.
I've yet to hear of Ruger or S&W not making good on a bad gun. I honestly think you can buy with confidence, knowing that you will either receive a very good gun, or the two top companies will make it good.
The idea that S&W is churning out pee-poor guns chaps my butt. If someone here thinks they can do better, do so. To date, no one else is beating them at their price range. Ruger equals them, but most Rugers are so different in feel from most S&Ws that it seems odd to think of them as competitors.
Update: The Model 29 is just a couple of days old. Don't know if it is a bit of dry firing, or a couple rounds of Rem Oil followed by compressed air, but the creep is gone.
Last edited:
mjackson
Member
I also believe this is a great time to buy firearms. If you factor in skilled labor rates (very high today) and cheap manufacturing methods (more choices than ever), there is a firearm for every fancy today. The problem is many of these discussions turn into apples to oranges comparisons and most of the time suffer from GDS- Glock Degenerative Syndrome, where every firearm eventually gets compared to the lowest common denominator. Forgive the heresy for the sake of argument, gents.
IF I want to buy a quality car, I'll pick the brain of the most experienced mechanic that I can find, function being more important than form to me. And it is the same with firearms FOR ME. Many of the well known gunsmiths today have valuable opinions, Grant Cunningham being one. Thanks Old Fuff for the info on the older stuff.
IF I want to buy a quality car, I'll pick the brain of the most experienced mechanic that I can find, function being more important than form to me. And it is the same with firearms FOR ME. Many of the well known gunsmiths today have valuable opinions, Grant Cunningham being one. Thanks Old Fuff for the info on the older stuff.
Billy Shears
Member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2008
- Messages
- 1,020
I just picked up a very nice 1940s 4in bbl Smith & Wesson Military & Police .38, with the original box for $330. Cosmetically, it's not like new, as it does show some holster wear, though not all that much. But mechanically, it's in great shape. I was happy to get it.
A couple of years ago, I picked up a 6 1/2in bbl Model 29 of 1960s vintage, complete with the old "coke bottle" grips. When I picked it up, I compared it to a brand new 6 1/2in bbl Model 29 in the same shop. The 1960s Smith had a hi-polish blued finish you could see yourself in. The finish on the new one looked worse than a wartime Model 1917 I used to own.
I have no interest in new production S&W revolvers. The fit & finish just isn't as good, and they've got that damnable lock.
A couple of years ago, I picked up a 6 1/2in bbl Model 29 of 1960s vintage, complete with the old "coke bottle" grips. When I picked it up, I compared it to a brand new 6 1/2in bbl Model 29 in the same shop. The 1960s Smith had a hi-polish blued finish you could see yourself in. The finish on the new one looked worse than a wartime Model 1917 I used to own.
I have no interest in new production S&W revolvers. The fit & finish just isn't as good, and they've got that damnable lock.
I just got warmed up. There are bunches of little inovations that came and went from the 1890's to 1940. They all depended on being able to assign endless time and skilled labor to something and still make money. For what should be obvious reasons; those who view firearms from a perspective of being fine machinery - as well as being something to go out and shoot, can sometimes buy examples at a fraction of what they'd cost if they were made today.
Current S&W revolvers are a little rough compared to the older, more refined models, it's true. But they benefit from improvements in metallurgy and alloys. Current lightweight J-frames can handle .357 Magnum ammo much better than I can in such small guns. Today we have stainless steel whereas older Smiths were beautifully blued but subject to corrosion without frequent attention. So, it's debatable as to whether or not new Smiths are worse than older ones IMO.
I've had a couple of S&W revolvers that came new with problems. The worst of them was from about 25-30 years ago. Smith fixed it and it cost me nothing. More recently, I had a new 642 with an issue in cylinder rotation. But I intended to have an action job performed on the gun when I bought it. The gunsmith resolved the problem when he did the action job.
I have my dad's old .38 M&P that he used back in the '50s as a LEO. The action is smooth as glass and the rounded and checkered walnut grip panels feel wonderful to the hand. But time has not been kind to the carbon steel, inside or out, and the blue finish is pitted and worn. I don't shoot that gun anymore, I'll just hold onto it. I carry a newer S&W 642 daily. It never started as pretty or as smooth as that old M&P but it's a practical gun for frequent use that doesn't need a great deal of attention. I guess that's the difference between modern arms and those of the past. Today, guns are built for hard use. They aren't made to be works of art and beauty. Older guns were often admired for their figured wood and deep finish as much as for their utility.
I've had a couple of S&W revolvers that came new with problems. The worst of them was from about 25-30 years ago. Smith fixed it and it cost me nothing. More recently, I had a new 642 with an issue in cylinder rotation. But I intended to have an action job performed on the gun when I bought it. The gunsmith resolved the problem when he did the action job.
I have my dad's old .38 M&P that he used back in the '50s as a LEO. The action is smooth as glass and the rounded and checkered walnut grip panels feel wonderful to the hand. But time has not been kind to the carbon steel, inside or out, and the blue finish is pitted and worn. I don't shoot that gun anymore, I'll just hold onto it. I carry a newer S&W 642 daily. It never started as pretty or as smooth as that old M&P but it's a practical gun for frequent use that doesn't need a great deal of attention. I guess that's the difference between modern arms and those of the past. Today, guns are built for hard use. They aren't made to be works of art and beauty. Older guns were often admired for their figured wood and deep finish as much as for their utility.
OldCavSoldier
Member
Of the revolvers I own, I have Colts, H&Rs, Rugers, and S&Ws. Manufactured years of the revolvers varies from 1937 to 2010. There are some really good things about the old guns, and there are some not so good things about the old guns - and the same for the newer guns. I can safely claim that all my revolvers perform exactly as I want them to and I have never had one that I just had to get rid of because of "workmanship" or "materials" or "quality" or anything else. Of course, I'm a rather plebian kind of guy and have never held a patrician view of anything.
Guillermo
member
pssst....Old Fuff...
whisper so no one can hear us
QUIT IT!!!
if someone wants to go pay more money for a crap gun, that is less competition for the good old guns!!!
I just picked up a pre-model 10 for 185 bucks (95% finish).
If these guys start looking for old guns the prices will skyrocket.
Or in other words SHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!
whisper so no one can hear us
QUIT IT!!!
if someone wants to go pay more money for a crap gun, that is less competition for the good old guns!!!
I just picked up a pre-model 10 for 185 bucks (95% finish).
If these guys start looking for old guns the prices will skyrocket.
Or in other words SHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!
Relax....
There are two kinds of people here - those that already know what we know, and those that think stainless steel, MIM, and never-touched-by-human- hands construction are the best thing since sliced bread. Some of them adore a less-then-one-pound pot metal snubby chambered in .357 Magnum. If S&W made a fly-weight, J-frame .44 Magnum they'd get in line to buy one.
Next thing you know they'll be buying revolvers with plastic parts in 'um.
Why they're even people out there who vote for Democtats...
Both of us will die of old age long before the supply of "real revolvers" run out. Ya' just have to know what rock to look under...
There are two kinds of people here - those that already know what we know, and those that think stainless steel, MIM, and never-touched-by-human- hands construction are the best thing since sliced bread. Some of them adore a less-then-one-pound pot metal snubby chambered in .357 Magnum. If S&W made a fly-weight, J-frame .44 Magnum they'd get in line to buy one.
Next thing you know they'll be buying revolvers with plastic parts in 'um.
Why they're even people out there who vote for Democtats...
Both of us will die of old age long before the supply of "real revolvers" run out. Ya' just have to know what rock to look under...
bsms
Member
Well, I'm glad I've got choices. I just bought new, and am happy with it. Needs at least another coat of wax, and then shoot it tomorrow. I need to do a side by side with my Alaskan...that would be a study in contrasts.
Those who prefer to seek out the old models have my best wishes in your search!
Those who prefer to seek out the old models have my best wishes in your search!
Guillermo
member
one particular site that u recommended is going to be the financial ruin of me.
(I just got home from mailing a check and FFL form)
I think this is the problem. We live in a world where most any manufacturer can manufacture at all quality levels, provided there is a profit in it. What they end up doing is manufacturing to a price point.
And we are seeing the effects of this. Craftsmanship and hand-fitting require expensive labor, whereas automation is cheap now. A century ago it was the other way 'round. The good side of it is this: firearms have never been cheaper. That revolver with amazing workmanship from a different era cost how much again? I'm not interested in the $25 price tag; I want to know how many weeks of an average worker's life that $25 represents.
Compare that to now. You can buy a pretty good gun for $450, and that's less than a week's wages. If you want quality there are folks who will sell it to you, but you are going to pay for it. An Ed Brown costs more than a Springfield (sorry - I know this is the wheel gun forum). A S&W cost less than a Colt.
The advantage today is this: do you want to pay for that high quality level, or get something 90% as good for a price that would make your ancestors jealous? Bemoan the loss of craftsmen all you want, but overall this is a positive change.
Guillermo
member
You are being generous
I don't own one any more, and I don't particularly like them, but it's hard to argue the value proposition of something like a Glock 17.
Guillermo
member
true
Autos have gotten cheaper and more dependable.
Such cannot be said for revolvers
bsms
Member
In 1960, a S&W Model 29 listed for $140. According to the Internet. I wasn't of gun buying age in 1960...
Adjusted for inflation, that would be $1020 now. A Model 29 list for $969. I suspect the internet makes it much harder to SELL one for list, but the fact is that if one adjusts for inflation, the price hasn't changed much.
The gun is different. I'll assume the trigger job is worse now, as is the bluing. However, I'd bet the metal is better, and it is probably more durable. Frankly, I'd also bet most shooters aren't qualified to care.
I'm not. My shooting problems aren't caused by an imperfect trigger, and I won't shoot enough high power loads out of it to ever break it.
Since S&W charges $155 for their " Master Revolver Action Package":
Trigger Stop
Chamfer Charge Holes
Polish Rebound Spring, Hammer Stud and Yoke Barrel Bosses
Detail Lockwork Surfaces
Stone Hammer and Trigger Contact Areas
Test Fire for Function
it is obvious they COULD market a S&W Model 29, minus the Hillary hole if they chose, with the above work done for a list price under $1100 - but apparently, they don't think there is a market for it.
Some of it depends on what the shooter wants. For a collector, the older gun is obviously better. As a work of hand crafted art, the older gun is obviously better. As a shooting gun for 90+% of those who buy one, including me? The new one will be fine.
I don't see much reason to knock either. My Ruger Alaskan looks awful, but shoots great. It has a very different 'personality' than my Model 29, but it isn't a 'bad' choice.
I buy new because I don't want to spend months searching, and because I almost never see what I would be interested in when I'm in a gun shop. I like the warranty. If S&W was marketing a gun at $1500 with a super bluing job & custom trigger, I'd still buy what I did.
Now, if they made one without the hole for $150 more, I'd spring for that...
Adjusted for inflation, that would be $1020 now. A Model 29 list for $969. I suspect the internet makes it much harder to SELL one for list, but the fact is that if one adjusts for inflation, the price hasn't changed much.
The gun is different. I'll assume the trigger job is worse now, as is the bluing. However, I'd bet the metal is better, and it is probably more durable. Frankly, I'd also bet most shooters aren't qualified to care.
I'm not. My shooting problems aren't caused by an imperfect trigger, and I won't shoot enough high power loads out of it to ever break it.
Since S&W charges $155 for their " Master Revolver Action Package":
Trigger Stop
Chamfer Charge Holes
Polish Rebound Spring, Hammer Stud and Yoke Barrel Bosses
Detail Lockwork Surfaces
Stone Hammer and Trigger Contact Areas
Test Fire for Function
it is obvious they COULD market a S&W Model 29, minus the Hillary hole if they chose, with the above work done for a list price under $1100 - but apparently, they don't think there is a market for it.
Some of it depends on what the shooter wants. For a collector, the older gun is obviously better. As a work of hand crafted art, the older gun is obviously better. As a shooting gun for 90+% of those who buy one, including me? The new one will be fine.
I don't see much reason to knock either. My Ruger Alaskan looks awful, but shoots great. It has a very different 'personality' than my Model 29, but it isn't a 'bad' choice.
I buy new because I don't want to spend months searching, and because I almost never see what I would be interested in when I'm in a gun shop. I like the warranty. If S&W was marketing a gun at $1500 with a super bluing job & custom trigger, I'd still buy what I did.
Now, if they made one without the hole for $150 more, I'd spring for that...
bsms
Member
"You are being generous".
Really? For shooting, do you think the new guns will fail more than 10% more often, or miss the target by 10% more error?
How do you define 90% as good?
Really? For shooting, do you think the new guns will fail more than 10% more often, or miss the target by 10% more error?
How do you define 90% as good?
Guillermo
member
build materials and build quality
fit @ finish
lack of tool marks
recall and warranty work
take your pick
I bought a 617-6 revolver new from Buds a couple of years ago. It had a barrel to cylinder gap of 0.012. Had to go back to S&W for a new barrel.
To be honest, probably half the firearms that I've bought new had problems with them. I doubt that any new guns get looked at by a real gunsmith before they leave the factory, just some low paid QC person, if that. Once I send them back, I think they go to a real gunsmith who goes over them and fixes every problem he finds.
The result of this is that I'm very leery of buying any more new guns.
To be honest, probably half the firearms that I've bought new had problems with them. I doubt that any new guns get looked at by a real gunsmith before they leave the factory, just some low paid QC person, if that. Once I send them back, I think they go to a real gunsmith who goes over them and fixes every problem he finds.
The result of this is that I'm very leery of buying any more new guns.
Guillermo
member
How do they get out of the factory?!?!?!
The answer is "no QC"
mjackson
Member
I also don't believe that S&W uses better alloys today than they did in the 1950's as lack of machine marks is no judge of a steel's toughness. Maybe someone more learned can confirm this. Few are the manufactures who select their materials and construction methods based on supreme durability and longevity, but a Swiss firm and a French firm do come to mind.
- Status
